http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... aur-fossil"As a geologist, Dr. Snelling added that unlike the way most of the Morrison Formation bones had been found scattered and mixed, the intact skeleton of this allosaur is testimony to extremely rapid burial, which is a confirmation of the global catastrophe of a Flood a few thousand years ago."

And the dishonest silent censorship of honest disagreement on the AiG Facebook page is ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING, Mr Ham.https://www.facebook.com/AnswersInGenesisI refer to the discussion under the reporting of the dinosaur acquisition story. People are noticing people being 'put in their place' and wondering why they cannot read the 'offending' post.

I went to Ken Ham's own page recently, answered a question by Mr Ham, and was instantly rudely censored blocked and apparently banned forever. The same sort of thing happened, after a delay, at the AiG Facebook page. (It would be embarrassing for people to keep saying "yes AiG do weed out all polite but serious disagreement on their Facebook page, and I too have had posts censored and totally ignored by Mr Ham and by AiG".)

Their teachings don't stand up to scrutiny by the well-informed and non-credulous. So they PREVENT all scrutiny of their anti-scientific dogma. Religious frauds, who embarrass honest Christians.

Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If there was a newly uncovered and largely complete fossil discovery which was identified as undeniably Australopithecus afarensis, and if someone then wished to donate it to the Creation Museum, would they politely decline it because it didn't look sufficiently ape-like?

For some reason I cannot open this link where Mr Ham reports that one of his prayers has been answered:http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29I think the glitch is at THEIR end. The opening part only of the post is quoted at Facebook:"World-Class Dinosaur Fossil Donated to Creation MuseumIt’s an answer to prayer!For years I’ve really wanted to see the Creation Museum display a world-class dinosaur fossil. The Creation Museum already displays some high-quality fossil dinosaur eggs and footprints (and some fossil bones)—and, of course, we also have impressive dinosaur sculptures meticulously sculpted by our own Buddy Davis. The Creation Museum also exhibits some classy animatronic dinosaurs that move realistically. Now next year, the Creation Museum will display the fossil remains of a remarkable specimen—an allosaur. Given to us by the Peroutka Foundation, it is believed to have one of the four best-preserved Allosaurus skulls ever discovered. . . .".

Ken Ham attacks a statement by real scientist:http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29Phelps stated "the Creation Museum doesn't do scientific research". Ken claims his wrong is wrong and 'irrational' - but in his response he says "Not only does Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum (which is owned by AiG) have a research division, it is a very active research department headed by an experienced and published scientist". Thus Ham's response addresses a somewhat wider topic than that of Phelps' who only mentioned the Creation Museum. I CAN SEE NO MENTION OF 'RESEARCH' ON THE CREATION MUSEUM WEBSITE. http://creationmuseum.org/http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/ar ... elling.aspThis page gives a biography for the AiG Director of Research - the SAME Andrew Snelling who is already telling the world that the 'Ebenezer' dinosaur must have perished in Noah's Flood. The page talks about 'research' by Dr Snelling whilst at AiG (since 2007). As far as I can make out, he is mainly covering 'old ground' where science already has answers - presumably in order to discredit those answers. "He is currently researching the radioisotope dating of meteorites". Has he actually studied any meteorites first hand? Or merely read the works of people who have done so? THIS PAGE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT RESEARCH, WHETHER SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE, CARRIED OUT AT OR BY THE CREATION MUSEUM ITSELF.

And a US national(?) press article:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html"“The Creation Museum has asserted the specimen to be evidence of Noah’s flood without any actual research,” said Dan Phelps, president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society".That statement appears to be TRUE. They have decided in advance of taking ownership of the fossil that because it is in good condition therefore it was rapidly buried therefore it died in Noah's Flood. That is not science.

"Our bodies are not made of star dust. That is just a man-made conjecture based on the fact that much of our body is made of water (H2O) and therefore we contain hydrogen atoms in our body". Scientists do NOT claim that hydrogen - the most abundant element in the universe - was only formed when massive stars exploded.

I assume Krauss - who is quoted by Larsen - knows what HE is talking about when he says "You couldn’t be here if stars hadn’t exploded, because the elements - the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution and for life - weren’t created at the beginning of time". Because according to Wikipedia "Supernovae are a key source of elements heavier than oxygen. These elements are produced by nuclear fusion (for iron-56 and lighter elements), and by nucleosynthesis during the supernova explosion for elements heavier than iron" - and carbon and nitrogen both appear to be lighter than oxygen ie they have a lower atomic number or number of protons in an atom (in the Periodic Table).

It seems carbon and nitrogen actually result from nuclear fusion - though I suppose supernovae are needed in order to form the next generation of stars and planets, including our solar system.

Ken Ham attacks a statement by real scientist:http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29Phelps stated "the Creation Museum doesn't do scientific research". Ken claims his wrong is wrong and 'irrational' - but in his response he says "Not only does Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum (which is owned by AiG) have a research division, it is a very active research department headed by an experienced and published scientist". Thus Ham's response addresses a somewhat wider topic than that of Phelps' who only mentioned the Creation Museum. I CAN SEE NO MENTION OF 'RESEARCH' ON THE CREATION MUSEUM WEBSITE. http://creationmuseum.org/http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/ar ... elling.aspThis page gives a biography for the AiG Director of Research - the SAME Andrew Snelling who is already telling the world that the 'Ebenezer' dinosaur must have perished in Noah's Flood. The page talks about 'research' by Dr Snelling whilst at AiG (since 2007). As far as I can make out, he is mainly covering 'old ground' where science already has answers - presumably in order to discredit those answers. "He is currently researching the radioisotope dating of meteorites". Has he actually studied any meteorites first hand? Or merely read the works of people who have done so? THIS PAGE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT RESEARCH, WHETHER SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE, CARRIED OUT AT OR BY THE CREATION MUSEUM ITSELF.

And a US national(?) press article:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html"“The Creation Museum has asserted the specimen to be evidence of Noah’s flood without any actual research,” said Dan Phelps, president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society".That statement appears to be TRUE. They have decided in advance of taking ownership of the fossil that because it is in good condition therefore it was rapidly buried therefore it died in Noah's Flood. That is not science.

Some nit-picking going on. Stardust we are, like it or not. Not the most authorative text, but a quick Google finds

Most of the carbon supporting life on Earth was forged by stars that never exploded, say astronomers in Michigan and Sweden. These stars cast the carbon into space when they blew off their outer atmospheres and became white dwarfs.

Carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen--atomic numbers 6, 7, and 8--are three of the most abundant elements in the universe. All are vital for human life. Astronomers already know that most of the nitrogen in Earth's atmosphere arose in stars that did not explode, whereas the oxygen you breathe came from stars that did explode. But carbon's origin is less clear: some studies place its birth in stars that later exploded, while other studies say just the opposite.

http://www.worldmag.com/2013/10/new_cre ... obal_flood (article flagged at the AiG Facebook page)"Secular scientists often say no fossils have ever been found to demonstrate humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Snelling contends lack of evidence that they inhabited the same areas does not prove they did not live during the same time. Even today, different biological organisms live in different environments. Elements such as climate, elevation, and food make the environment more hospitable to one species and not to another. Dinosaurs appear to have lived in a different biological community than humans".How convenient. Trouble is, it seems no humans have recorded the historical presence of live dinosaurs within the last 4,300 years, despite humanity exploring all biological communities that the creatures could have lived in upon the planet.

A very readable and highly pertinent comment has been made under the rather silly article.

http://www.wlwt.com/news/local-news/new ... index.html"The fossil will be the subject of study at the Creation Museum. Ham said they are still outlining the research they will be doing, but he has an interest in looking at how the fossil was dated and examining the assumptions behind the dating methods";"As for allowing access to the Allosaurus for other researchers Ham said, "We’d be happy for secular scientists to come and look at it as well"".